INL Should Fight Crime, Not Fight Conservatives

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34               INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS  AND LAW ENFORCE-5                 MENT SHOULD FIGHT CRIME, NOT FIGHT CON-6                 SERVATIVES78=======================================================================910                                HEARING1112                                 OF THE1314                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON WESTERN HEMISPHERE1516                               BEFORE THE1718                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS19                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES2021                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2223                             FIRST SESSION24                               __________2526                             March 27, 202527                               __________2829                            Serial No. 119-930                               __________3132        Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs3334               [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3536Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov, http://docs.house.gov,37                       or http://www.govinfo.gov38                                ______3940                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE414260-455 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 20254344                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS4546                    BRIAN J. MAST, Florida, Chairman47MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas             GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York,48CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey       Ranking Member49JOE WILSON,, South Carolina          BRAD SHERMAN, California50SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania            GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia51DARRELL ISSA, California             WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts52TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee              AMI BERA, California53MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee             JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas54ANDY BARR, Kentucky                  DINA TITUS, Nevada55RONNY JACKSON, Texas                 TED LIEU, California56YOUNG KIM, California                SARA JACOBS, California57MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida        SHEILA CHERFILUS-McCORMICK,58BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan                Florida59AUMUA AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN,       GREG STANTON, Arizona60  American Samoa                     JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida61WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio                JONATHAN L. JACKSON, Illinois62JIM R. BAIRD, Indiana                SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California63THOMAS H. KEAN, JR, New Jersey       JIM COSTA, California64MICHAEL LAWLER, New York             GABE AMO, Rhode Island65CORY MILLS, Florida                  KWEISI MFUME, Maryland66KEITH SELF, Texas                    PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington67RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana               GEORGE LATIMER, New York68JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                JOHNNY OLSZEWSKI Jr, Maryland69ANNA PAULINA LUNA, Florida           JULIE JOHNSON, Texas70JEFFERSON SHREVE, Indiana            SARAH McBRIDE, Delaware71SHERI BIGGS, South Carolina          BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois72MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington      MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania73RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania7475              James Langenderfer, Majority Staff Director76                 Sajit Gandhi, Minority Staff Director7778                                 ------7980                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON WESTERN HEMISPHERE8182               MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida, Chairwoman83CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey     JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas, Ranking84MARK GREEN, Tennessee                  Member85MICHAEL LAWLER, New York             DINA TITUS, Nevada86CORY MILLS, Florida                  SARA JACOBS, California87JEFFERSON SHREVE, Indiana            GREG STANTON, Arizona88SHERI BIGGS, South Carolina          JONATHAN JACKSON, Illinois89RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania         SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California9091              Maggie Goessler, Subcommittee Staff Director9293                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S9495                              ----------9697                            REPRESENTATIVES9899                                                                   Page100Opening Statement of Subcommittee Chairwoman Maria Elvira Salazar     1101Opening Statement of Subcommittee Ranking Member Joaquin Castro..     3102103                               WITNESSES104105Statement of Chelsa Kenney, Director, International Affairs and106  Trade, United States Government Accountability Office..........     5107  Prepared Statement.............................................     7108Statement of Andres Martinez-Fernandez, Senior Policy Analyst,109  Latin America, Allison Center for National Security at The110  Heritage Foundation............................................    26111  Prepared Statement.............................................    28112Statement of Adam Isacson, Director, Defense Oversight,113  Washington Office, on Latin America............................    32114  Prepared Statement.............................................    34115116                                APPENDIX117118Hearing Notice...................................................    66119Hearing Minutes..................................................    68120Hearing Attendance...............................................    69121122                        Questions for the Record123124Questions submitted by Rep. Dina Titus to Chelsa Kenney..........    70125126                  INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND LAW EN-127                    FORCEMENT SHOULD FIGHT CRIME, NOT128                    FIGHT CONSERVATIVES129130                              ----------131132                        Thursday, March 27, 2025133134                  House of Representatives,135            Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere,136                              Committee on Foreign Affairs,137                                                    Washington, DC.138139    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:21 a.m., in140room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Maria Elvira141Salazar [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding.142    Ms. Salazar. Welcome to all of you. Thank you for staying143after votes.144    The subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere will come to145order. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss the Bureau of146International Narcotics and Law Enforcement for the purposes of147the subcommittee's reauthorization of J family programming at148the State Department. Now I am going to recognize myself for an149opening statement.150151         OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRWOMAN MARIA ELVIRA152                           SALAZAR153154    Once again, thank you to the witnesses for coming and155giving us your time and your expertise. Always welcome. So the156Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs,157INL, acronym, the motto is security through justice. But,158unfortunately, for the last 4 years they have been more159interested in security through ideology, trading fight against160narcotics for seminars to teach pronouns and workshops on161gender diversity.162    I believe that the result of this alien ideology has been163damaging to our national security, especially in a region which164is very close to my heart, Central America. As some of you165know, I was the Central American bureau chief for Univision166Network during the Civil War in El Salvador, I lived in that167country for many years until 1992 when they signed a peace168treaty. Central America, don't I know it, has suffered for169decades, and this was the perfect time to help them.170    Let's go to Guatemala. Almost 9 million migrants passed171through their territory trying to come to the United States in172the last 4 years. The Guatemalans needed INL's assistance to173tackle the human trafficking and narcotics. But, unfortunately,174the Biden administration refused to work with the attorney175general of that country because, apparently, she was too176conservative. They sanctioned her. Her name is Consuelo Porras.177I don't know her, but I do know that she is the head of178ministerio publico, which is for us, the United States, the179attorney generals--the attorney general.180    Unfortunately, the previous administration refused to work181with her. I believe that if the Guatemalans put her there, the182Biden's bureaucrats don't have any business in telling her that183she was not fit for the job and they attacked her over and over184again.185    This is the perfect definition of putting politics and186ideology before safety and respect for our neighbors' political187views. If the Guatemalans are conservative, well, so be it. We188have got to respect it.189    Let's talk now about El Salvador, the country which has190been tackling a terrible gang problem for 30 years. I was191killed--I mean, I was about to be killed in few instances; I192lived it, I know it and things were terrible in El Salvador193until President Bukele arrived in the picture.194    El Salvador should have been a perfect partner for the INL195Bureau--which, by the way, it says that its mandate is to bring196down transnational criminal organizations like MS-13 and Tren197de Aragua. But instead of training the Salvadorian police198forces, INL law enforcement academy taught gender and inclusion199as one of their main goals for El Salvador. I believe, I am200sure, that at that moment the Salvadorian were going to be201saying, the gringos have gone crazy. I am no law enforcement202expert, but I am fairly confident that getting MS-13 to learn203how to pronounce correctly pronouns is not going to destroy204them from committing any crimes.205    I am a witness--I have spoken to him--that Bukele wants to206work with the United States. But, instead, the Biden207administration cut funds to the Salvadorian police by 50208percent. Why? And INL concentrated its budget for El Salvador209to give it to NGO's that attack his security plan.210    With or without us, Bukele was successful. His strategy211reduced one of the world's highest homicide rates to nearly212zero. He presented the strategy to INL, and they said, no, we213are not going to work with you.214    During the last 4 years, unfortunately, woke ideology has215replaced common sense. But thankfully, things have changed216under President Trump, and we are going to return the Bureau of217International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs to its218original mission, which is helping allies fight crime,219dismantling gangs, restoring law and order.220    They have a budget of $2 billion a year, and I think we owe221it to the American taxpayers to commit and re-establish their222mandate; finding drugs, stopping human trafficking, training223police forces worldwide with American-made weapons bought by224our allies. INL is one of the best tools we have as Americans225to create a safer, stronger, and more prosperous country, while226helping our neighbors to do the same, whether it is in Central227America or anywhere else in the world.228    I believe that we are still the United States. We are the229point of reference for the rest of the hemisphere at least when230it comes to good governance, the beacon of hope that there is a231political system that respects human dignity. Thank God we are232back on the right side of history.233    I yield back. And now I recognize my dear ranking member,234the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Castro, for any statements he may235have.236237           OPENING STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER JOAQUIN238                             CASTRO239240    Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairwoman. Good afternoon,241everyone. Thank you, Chairwoman, for convening this hearing,242and thank you to our witnesses for testifying at the243subcommittee's first hearing in Congress--this Congress.244    The topic of this hearing is broadly to discuss the245reauthorization of the State Department's Bureau of246International Narcotics and Law Enforcement. This is certainly247important, and I look forward to the discussion on this issue,248but I first need to paint a picture of what's going on right249now.250    In just the last few weeks, we have witnessed a deeply251troubling pattern of executive overreach and undermining of252congressional authority. The administration has attempted to253dismantle congressionally established agencies--USAID, the254Inter-American Foundation, and the U.S. African Development255Foundation--all without a single hearing from this committee256where the administration has defended its actions.257    The Trump administration is trying to shut down the U.S.258Agency for Global Media, a move cheered by autocrats and259dictators from Havana to Moscow to Beijing to Caracas. They are260trying to do this without this committee, the full committee,261demanding the administration even explain themselves. The262committee has given up its role of oversight. It has abandoned263any oversight of the Trump administration, which is astounding264in the history of Congress.265    The committee has abandoned--I am sorry. We, as a Nation,266because of the Trump administration, have abandoned brave human267rights defenders in Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and everywhere268else in the world as we went back on our word and froze269programs that support them. We left them to get rounded up and270put in prison. That is what this administration has done.271    The committee has not called Secretary Rubio in or any272other administration official to explain these actions. That is273why I say they have abandoned any oversight responsibilities.274    Donald Trump has canceled temporary protected status and275humanitarian parole for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans,276Nicaraguans, Haitians, and Cubans who have sought refuge in our277country as millions of people have over generations. These were278people who had status to be here. This is after President Trump279said that he would only go after criminals.280    Masked ICE agents are pulling people off the streets in281Texas, in Florida, and in cities across our country and sending282them to prisons in El Salvador without any due process at all.283President Bukele has become a mercenary for prisoners--to house284prisoners from the United States and, I imagine, other parts of285the world.286    Every day we learn of new horrors and innocent people287brutalized by the administration. To do this, the Trump288administration has used a wartime authority, the Alien Enemies289Act, and claimed that we are being invaded by Venezuela. The290idea that we are currently at war with Venezuela would be news291to most Americans. In fact, it would be news to almost all292Americans. If we are truly at war, I certainly--I certainly293think this committee should be holding a hearing on it.294    Unfortunately, what we are seeing from the Republican295majority is a total surrender of their power as legislators.296Why hasn't this committee demanded testimony from Secretary297Rubio, Pete Marocco, and others on all of this? We need298answers, we need accountability, and we need this committee to299do its job.300    We meet at a time when the United States is facing serious,301complex threats abroad, and the responses from this Congress302and this administration have too often been silence, confusion,303or political theater. Across the world vital U.S. foreign304assistance programs, many of them managed through the INL305Bureau, have been cut, delayed, or outright canceled.306    We have seen freezes to police academy training in Mexico,307programs designed to disrupt human trafficking, and efforts to308equip law enforcement agencies across the globe with the tools309to fight money laundering, fentanyl production, and organized310crime. These aren't just line items in a budget. They are311lifelines to communities here and abroad.312    The impacts of those decisions are not abstract. They313absolutely make Americans less safe. When you see more fentanyl314entering this country, when violent cartels operate with315impunity, this is part of the reason why. These decisions will316haunt us in the coming years.317    As we turn specifically to the reauthorization of the INL318Bureau and its programs, we must approach reauthorization with319clear eyes. INL has been a critical tool in our foreign policy320toolkit, but I agree that it must evolve. Synthetic drugs like321fentanyl are not only devastating American families, they are322destabilizing entire regions. Scam centers and cyber-enabled323fraud schemes are preying on our most vulnerable citizens. INL324must be equipped and reoriented to tackle these challenges.325    At the same time, we must resist the impulse to think that326security means police alone. Sustainable progress requires more327than just training and equipping security forces. It means328building robust justice systems, effective prosecutors,329professional judges, strong defense attorneys, independent330courts, prisons, and investing in the civil society actors who331hold their leaders accountable. Funding police while defunding332anti-corruption and Rule of Law programs is not just333shortsighted, it is dangerous, and it is counterproductive.334    Today's hearing is an opportunity to begin a serious,335hopefully sober, conversation about what INL needs to succeed336and what reforms we need to pursue to ensure its work aligns337with our values, advances our interest, and keeps our338communities safe.339    Thank you, Chairwoman, and I yield back.340    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Castro. Thank you for your341statement.342    Now we are pleased to have a distinguished panel of343witnesses before us today on this important topic. Let me344introduce Ms. Chelsa Kenney. She is the Director, International345Affairs and Trade, for the U.S. Government Accountability346Office. Thank you and welcome.347    Mr. Andres Martinez-Fernandez, senior policy analyst, Latin348America, Allison Center for National Security at the Heritage349Foundation.350    Mr. Adam Isacson, Director for Defense Oversight,351Washington office, on Latin America.352    This committee recognizes the importance of the issues353before us and is grateful to have you here to speak to us354today. Your full statements will be made part of the record,355and I will ask each of you to keep your spoken remarks to 5356minutes in order to allow time for members' questions.357    Now I recognize Ms. Kenney for her opening statement.358359                   STATEMENT OF CHELSA KENNEY360361    Ms. Kenney. Chairwoman Salazar, Ranking Member Castro, and362members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to363discuss our findings and recommendations related to the Bureau364of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs.365    INL contributes to some of the U.S. Government's top366security priorities. These include combatting the flow of367illicit narcotics into the U.S., promoting Rule of Law around368the world, and combatting transnational crime. We have reviewed369many of INL's programs in recent years and identified successes370as well as opportunities for improvement in at least 15371reports, many at the request of this committee.372    Since 2020, we have made 16 recommendations to improve the373effectiveness of INL programs. I will highlight three key areas374of improvement related to performance management, program375monitoring, and program evaluation.376    First, we have made five recommendations to improve how INL377is managing the performance of its projects. Of these, INL has378implemented one recommendation on combatting firearms379trafficking in Mexico, but four related to firearms trafficking380in the Caribbean and on assistance to Mexico more broadly381remain unaddressed. Performance management is meant to ensure382that the U.S. Government is spending taxpayer dollars383effectively and achieving U.S. goals.384    For example, since 2008, the U.S. has provided over $3385billion in assistance to Mexico to address crime and violence386and enhance the country's Rule of Law. However, in 2023, we387reported that INL could not demonstrate that it was achieving388its goals because of gaps in its approach to performance389management.390    Specifically, we found that INL had established goals and391objectives but had not identified which of its projects were392key to achieving them. So, for example, under the goal of393preventing transborder crime, INL had established a joint394objective with Mexico to disrupt and dismantle narcotics395production; however, while INL implemented and collected data396on individual projects, it had not linked which of these397projects were helping to meet this goal.398    We recommended that INL strengthen its performance399management approach to determine whether it was achieving its400goals in Mexico. Considering the importance of the U.S.-Mexico401relationship and the level of U.S. investment, we have402identified this to be a priority recommendation for the agency.403    Second, we have made six recommendations to improve INL's404program monitoring. Of these, INL has implemented three, but405three related to its wildlife trafficking programs remain406unaddressed. Consistent program monitoring helps assess407progress and identify problems that might prevent the Bureau408from reaching its goals. Wildlife trafficking is a crime that409fuels corruption and destabilizes communities.410    In recent years, media reports have alleged that park411rangers trained by U.S.-funded entities had committed human412rights abuses, including sexual assault and murder. Since 2020,413State has taken steps to enhance safeguards to prevent these414abuses; however, we found that INL had not conducted consistent415program monitoring to ensure that these U.S.-funded entities416reported on the implementation or effectiveness of these417safeguards. We also found an alleged incident of sexual abuse418by a ranger that INL was unaware of.419    INL agreed with our recommendations, including that it420clarify reporting requirements for human rights abuses.421    Third, we have made two recommendations to INL to conduct422program evaluations or studies that would determine how well a423program is working. For example, in 2024 we reported that,424despite years of support for activities to strengthen the425security situation in Haiti, including specific efforts to426improve the capacity of Haiti's national police, INL had no427formal plans to evaluate the effectiveness of its activities.428We recommended that INL conduct such an evaluation, and the429Bureau agreed.430    INL plays a critical role in achieving U.S. security431priorities, such as combatting transnational crime and432supporting Rule of Law worldwide. INL's effectiveness depend on433robust performance management, program monitoring, and program434evaluation. While INL has made some progress, important gaps435remain.436    We urge INL to fully implement our recommendations to help437ensure that it is spending taxpayer dollars effectively and438achieving U.S. goals.439    Thank you, and I would be pleased to respond to your440questions.441    [The prepared statement of Ms. Kenney follows:]442443    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]444445    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Ms. Kenney.446    Now I recognize Mr. Martinez-Fernandez for his opening447statement.448449             STATEMENT OF ANDRES MARTINEZ-FERNANDEZ450451    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. Thank you, Chairwoman Salazar,452Ranking Member Castro, and members for holding this hearing and453inviting me to participate.454    The Western Hemisphere is experiencing a period of surging455instability, violence, and criminality, largely driven by456increasingly powerful criminal organizations. From Haiti's457collapse at the hands of gangs, newfound narcoviolence in a458once peaceful Ecuador, increasingly deadly drug cartels in459Mexico and Colombia, and more, we are constantly confronted by460evidence of a failed status quo for security in our hemisphere.461    These threats do not stay in Latin America. Instead, they462drive increasingly deadly and destabilizing consequences to the463United States and directly to the American people. The absence464of robust and effective security engagement from the United465States in Latin America is a key driver of the current State of466affairs.467    Indeed, the collapse of the hemispheric consensus on468counternarcotics is due in no small part to decisions on the469part of Washington to blunt and curb security cooperation in470the Americas away from the core support from regional security471forces. This trend is driven, in part, by Washington's focus on472other foreign conflicts, as well as a series of challenges that473we continue to focus on in other parts of the world.474    However, the impact and inattention that this has brought475has exacerbate--been exasperated by mission drift and the476watering down of critical institutions like the State477Department's International Narcotics and Law Enforce Bureau.478Additionally, hemispheric security and stability has suffered479from the Biden administration's politicization of U.S. security480engagement and tools in Latin America.481    The so-called expert consensus on Latin America security482policy has shifted dramatically over the past few decades483prompting detrimental changes in the nature and magnitude of484U.S. security cooperation. Vocal leaders and activists have485successfully framed organized crime in Latin America as486primarily being an issue of economic development and judicial487institutions, deemphasizing in particular the role of488enforcement and security forces.489    Today, at the core of this new conventional wisdom in many490circles in Washington and in the region, is the increasingly--491is increasingly the poorly substantiated claim that confronting492Latin America's powerful criminal organizations only serve to493exasperate--exacerbate insecurity and criminality.494    One of the key events that provided support for this view495was the spike in violence in Mexico during the late 2000's496following President Felipe Calderon's efforts to crack down on497the cartels. However, notably, today after over a decade during498which the Mexican government has pulled back from confronting499the cartels, Mexico's homicide rates now exceed the worst years500of violence during the Calderon administration. Add to that the501over 100,000 overdose deaths in the United States due to502fentanyl and other deadly drugs.503    Indeed, Mexico's disastrous hugs, not bullets strategy on504the cartels showcases the dire consequences of deemphasizing505enforcement and security forces in our security policies in the506Western Hemisphere. When President Andres Manuel Lopez507Obrador--apology.508    With Mexico, the Merida Initiative drifted away from its509initial focus of providing training, equipment, and operational510support to Mexican security forces and, instead, shifted511support to--instead, U.S. support shifted for reform of the512Mexican judicial system increasingly.513    Then, when President Lopez Obrador fully abandoned the514Merida Initiative, the new security cooperation framework515further de-emphasized security forces and the role of516enforcement as a core aspect of security policy.517    In both Mexico, Colombia, and elsewhere, the United States518failed to push back on regional leaders' abandonment of519security cooperation and commitments. This was particularly520egregious under the Biden administration where we saw the521increase of deaths of American people reaching 100,000 each522year due to fentanyl and other drugs; and yet, we did not523adequately push the administration in Mexico to address the524security threat posed by the cartels.525    Even worse, at times the Biden administration leaned into526its wrongheaded approach within the region to--apologies--527leaned into this wrongheaded approach on organized crime by528regional leaders. In the case of Colombia, President Biden529actively drew attention away from Colombia's deteriorating530security situation by ending the long-standing program of U.S.531monitoring of coca cultivation.532    To confront the dire threats posed by organized crime in533our hemisphere, U.S. security assistance through INL and other534critical agencies should be bolstered and refocused on the core535mission of counternarcotics and transnational organized crime.536Failure to do so urgently will bring increasingly deadly537consequences for Latin America and for the American people.538    Thank you very much.539    [The prepared statement of Mr. Martinez-Fernandez follows:]540541    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]542543    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Martinez-Fernandez.544    I now recognize Mr. Isacson for his opening statement.545546                   STATEMENT OF ADAM ISACSON547548    Mr. Isacson. Chairwoman Salazar, Ranking Member Castro,549thank you so much for holding this hearing and for inviting me.550    The State Department's Bureau of INL manages the largest551U.S. aid account for security forces in Latin America and the552Caribbean, though it pays for other things, too. Worldwide, it553is about a billion and a half dollars. In our hemisphere, it is554at least $600 million.555    Now, for years, INL was jokingly known as the drugs and556thugs bureau. Its success was measured in hectares eradicated557and kilos seized and kingpins arrested. That narrow focus558reflects its 1980's-era statute, and it hasn't really worked.559You don't have to take my word for it. Just look at overdose560deaths, look at street prices.561    Meanwhile, our understanding of organized crime and how to562combat it has evolved. Yes, drugs are still a top revenue563stream for criminal groups, but crime groups also make billions564from gold mining, migrant smuggling, extortion, and more;565sometimes at even bigger profits than they are getting from566drugs. The drug market itself has shifted toward synthetics,567like fentanyl and meth, which don't involve most of Latin568America outside Mexico. And mass migration has made the569question urgent. How can we help people feel safe enough to570stay in their own communities?571    This reframes success. It is no longer just kilos and572hectares. It is whether people feel secure, it is whether573justice works, it is whether officials fear punishment for574corruption. To its credit, INL has shifted. It no longer tries575to fight crime the way you would fight a guerilla insurgency.576While guerillas fight governments, organized crime infiltrates577them and hollows them out by bribing, threatening, co-opting,578and corrupting. That makes it a much harder, much more complex579fight.580    Now, in response, INL has begun putting more emphasis on581the L, Rule of Law and civilian law enforcement, rather than582just the N. Funding has increasingly gone to prosecutors,583judicial institutions, police academies, oversight bodies, and584independent experts and investigators, a whole comprehensive585security sector, a table with many legs, and not just the586people wearing uniforms.587    There is a growing realization that real progress is going588to take time, and it depends on breaking collusion between589government and crime. That is why efforts like the Commission590Against Impunity in Guatemala, the CICIG, mattered so much.591Brave people made historic anti-corruption gains, and INL was592there to support them.593    Ironically, de-narcotizing INL's mission may be the best594way to reduce drug supplies in the long-term. But that shift595also means we need to rethink some obsolete frameworks, like596the annual drug certification process. As the 2020 Western597Hemisphere Drug Policy Commission noted, it is a relic. It598hasn't been used to seriously cut aid since the 1990's, and599even then a Republican majority Congress and a Democratic White600House scrambled in the late 1990's to restore it when security601began deteriorating in Colombia.602    So, yes, INL needs reform. WOLA supports a serious rethink603to bring the Bureau and its statutes into the mid-21st century.604What we don't support is a rushed 90-day review full of abrupt605freezes and cuts with no input from partners around the world,606many of whom have been risking their lives to fight corruption607and crime and really depend on the relationship with us.608    The little we have seen of the proposed cuts so far is609worrying. Aid to police and military agencies looks mostly610untouched, but support to civil society, justice institutions,611U.N. programs, that looks like it is cut by about half. The612risks turning--that risk is turning INL back into what it once613was, a little drugs and thugs bureau, and we know where that614leads; brief dips in violence or drug supplies followed by615resurgence.616    It is just a constant game of whack-a-mole. Organized crime617figures get taken down, but organized crime remains strong.618Corrupt officials keep operating with impunity. People keep619fleeing their homes, often coming here.620    I am not asking to preserve the status quo. Frankly, I621can't defend much of it because I can't see it. Public622reporting on INL aid has become vague, inconsistent, and far623less quantitative. It is hard to track where the money goes and624what it achieves. And reporting requirements, if we do625reauthorize INL, have to improve. Right now, oversight is626difficult, and it makes the whole program hard to defend when627an administration comes to power questioning its entire value.628    This committee can help. First, it can urge INL to keep629expanding its focus on organized crime, corruption, and citizen630security, not just counternarcotics.631    Second, it can press for much better transparency.632    Third, it can insist that any reform effort be thoughtful,633inclusive, and deliberate, not a 90-day rollback. There is lots634of space for bipartisan agreement here, I think.635    I look forward to exploring that here and any other time636that you would like in the future. Thank you again for637organizing this discussion.638    [The prepared statement of Mr. Isacson follows:]639640    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]641642    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Isacson. Now--for your643testimony, I now recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning.644    I am delighted to hear, Mr. Isacson, that you believe645certain quotes here, that INL needs to be modernized and needs646to be reformed, and that maybe they are just following some of647the precepts of the 1980's. But, specifically, I agree that648they are not--that they need to be reorganized, and there needs649to be some revamped, but let's go to the last 4 years.650    Do you really believe that talking to the Guatemalans and651to the Salvadorians about gender ideology or the pronouns or652how you can--there are many genders--do you really think that653talking to them was going to make the United States and654themselves safer? I mean, you are going to keep people home? So655explain how one thing comes linked to the other.656    Mr. Isacson. I would like to know what percentage of the657program actually was about gender and identity and things like658that. If it is--we don't have that data.659    Ms. Salazar. Focused, main focus. The Guatemalans were660complaining.661    Mr. Isacson. In terms of dollar amounts?662    Ms. Salazar. Of course. And in terms of political663willingness and desire to infiltrate these forces with our664ideology, the American Biden administration ideology. Don't you665think that it was--we did a disservice to them and to us?666    Mr. Isacson. If you are fighting human trafficking where667most victims are women----668    Ms. Salazar. Yes.669    Mr. Isacson [continuing]. you need to ignore the gender----670    Ms. Salazar. How can you be talking about sex, when you are671trying to find human trafficking?672    Mr. Isacson. If you are fighting gender violence, that is673true.674    Ms. Salazar. How do you do that?675    Mr. Isacson. I just need to know, you know, how much of the676programming really did go in that direction instead of--like677Joint Task Force Alpha in Guatemala----678    Ms. Salazar. Ask the Guatemalans.679    Mr. Isacson [continuing]. which was fighting human680smugglers----681    Ms. Salazar. The Guatemalans--perfect example. They hated a682lady by the name of Consuelo Porras. Do I know her? No, I683don't. But I know that she is the AG of the country. So why684don't we work with her? Oh, because she is too conservative.685Who are we to say that--to the Guatemalans. Why?686    Mr. Isacson. I don't know if Consuelo Porras is hated----687    Ms. Salazar. Everything I am saying is quoted. Consuelo688Porras is detested.689    Mr. Isacson. Oh, I think she is detested, yes.690    Ms. Salazar. It was--OK. But who are we, the Americans, to691come and say, oh, Consuelo is not the person that you need to692work with? She is the AG.693    Mr. Isacson. I have never heard that she was held at arm's694length because of--because she favored free markets or like,695you know----696    Ms. Salazar. She was too conservative.697    Mr. Isacson [continuing]. because she was too conservative.698It was because of----699    Ms. Salazar. She was too conservative.700    Mr. Isacson [continuing]. significant corruption, according701to what I saw.702    Ms. Salazar. You know what I am telling you. So please help703me understand why the Biden administration wanted to704concentrate its resources when it talks to reforming and705securing the Salvadorian-Guatemalan police, concentrated on706something that had nothing to do with national security for the707United States.708    Mr. Isacson. My impression was that INL and the justice709department worked very hard with--not with Consuelo, but with710the rest of the public ministry in Guatemala on something711called Joint Task Force Alpha, which was a big effort to get at712the nodes of the network of migrant smuggling. And they have713actually taken out a lot of migrant smugglers working with the714attorney general's office in Guatemala in the last few years.715And the Trump administration is expanding that.716    Ms. Salazar. INL, did you know this, would give money to717the NGO's in Guatemala to help the migrants go have a smoother718ride while they were going to Guatemala and getting to Mexico?719    Mr. Isacson. I think that would have been illegal in720Guatemala where they actually arrest and deport more than72120,000, 30,000 migrants a year back into Honduras.722    Ms. Salazar. Nine million went through it.723    Mr. Isacson. Yes. A lot do get through, yes.724    Ms. Salazar. All right. Let's go to El Salvador. Bukele,725what do you think--what ranking do you give to Bukele from one726to ten?727    Mr. Isacson. I would give him--I would give him a four,728perhaps. I think he is a brilliant communicator, but I do worry729about checks and balances.730    Ms. Salazar. Forget about the communicator. What has he731done with the country?732    Mr. Isacson. He has put 3 percent of the male population in733prison, which, yes, by doing so did eradicate for now a lot of734the gangs.--feature of democracy.735    Ms. Salazar. And you and I agree that if there is one736innocent guy in the CECOT, I was the first one who told him you737got to get him out because we don't want innocent people in738jail. But the thing is that, you know, CECOT, the people who739are full of tattoos that are revealing who they were and what740they did, you know, each drop meant one murder. So you think he741did something right?742    Mr. Isacson. If these people were facing judges and if743their families knew what was going on with them, it would be744right. But right now, almost everybody there is pretrial, and745there is not even dates for most of their trials. So, yes, they746need a fair shake. I mean, it was right to clean out the747streets.748    Ms. Salazar. I agree with you, that everyone needs due749process, yes, sir.750    Mr. Isacson. That is just not happening right now.751    Ms. Salazar. All right. But what about us working with him?752Maybe if INL would have done its job, then Bukele would have753been able to really help--we would help him to do a better job,754don't you think?755    Mr. Isacson. I----756    Ms. Salazar. Talking about diversity and inclusion and757pronouns.758    Mr. Isacson. I think one of INL's biggest obstacles759actually there is--and I actually support it--is language that760both Republicans and Democrats put in the foreign aid bill761saying that half of aid--I believe it is half--to El Salvador762is cut until they can certify that the human rights situation763is good and is improving.764    Right now more than 300 people dying in the jails in the765last 3 years and widespread allegations of torture, it has been766hard to certify that.767    Ms. Salazar. What happens to the human rights of the people768who were outside being killed by those gang members, which is769why he got 90 percent of transparency----770    Mr. Isacson. Oh, yes.771    Ms. Salazar [continuing]. internationally observed772elections; we agree with that, right?773    Mr. Isacson. Oh, yes. If I was a shopkeeper being774extorted----775    Ms. Salazar. Why do we have to hate him? Who are we to say776to this guy, don't do it that way?777    Mr. Isacson. I think we are just worried about what it is778going to look like in 5 years. But, yes, right now if I am a779shopkeeper who had to pay----780    Ms. Salazar. That is--don't you think that they should be781concerned about what they are going to be looking like 5 years782from now? That is their concern, not ours. We are here to help783them have a better police force.784    All right. You agree with that, right?785    Mr. Isacson. We are certainly here to help them have a786better police force, but we don't want to be funding abuses in787the short-term.788    Ms. Salazar. I think that I am exceeding my time. I yield789back.790    Now I am going to recognize the ranking member for 5791minutes. Thank you.792    Mr. Isacson. Thank you.793    Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairwoman. I want to take up this794issue really quickly because, you know, we disagree, Maria, on795this. I don't think there has ever been a bias of the United796States in--against conservative leaders and in favor of leftist797leaders.798    In fact, when you look at the history of the U.S.799involvement in Latin America, Latin America has often--I mean,800the United States, unfortunately, in decades past worked to801undermine the leadership of leaders on the left and treated802leaders on the right as friends; and, in fact, supported what803were some of the most brutal dictatorships, like the Pinochet804ruling in Chile.805    When we think about how we--how we provide U.S. assistance,806how we provide taxpayer money, the way we should be thinking807about it is, who is operating consistent with U.S. values and808what we stand for? So democracy, freedom, respect for human809rights.810    Really, regardless of where you are in the political811spectrum, whether you are on the left or the right as a leader,812we ought to support leaders who are pursuing those things.813    Consuelo Porras, as I understand, had been sanctioned for814severe corruption. That is why we are not working with her, not815because she has got a certain ideology. And Bukele also, I816think it is true--I mean, he has gotten a lot of crime off the817streets and has scared a lot of people, especially young men,818but so has Xi Jinping in China.819    So, you know, if the question is, well, why don't we just820let people do what they are going to do, OK, I get that. But821the question for us is, are we going to back them up with money822to commit human rights abuses and other things that we would823never allow for in the United States ourselves?824    Now, bear in mind, in the last few weeks we have seen some825disturbing instances of people literally being picked off the826street for having exercised their First Amendment rights by827government agents who don't identify themselves, who aren't828dressed in uniform, and who barely present credentials, if at829all. Those are the kinds of activities that you are used to830seeing in countries that violate people's rights.831    So just with that disagreement, let me get into a question832really quick.833    Ms. Kenney, as you know, the administration is conducting834multiple reviews of foreign assistance programs. And I believe835those programs have been incredibly disruptive and that the836review has not been done in good faith.837    In 2019, the first Trump administration did something838similar on a smaller scale. They unilaterally froze $400839million in foreign assistance funding in Central America for840over 14 months. At the time I, along with other colleagues,841requested the GAO assess the impacts of that freeze. The GAO842determined that many programs, including State Department INL843Bureau programs, had been adversely affected.844    Based on your experience with the 2019 freeze, do you845expect adverse effects from the ongoing freeze on many INL846programs?847    Ms. Kenney. Thank you for that question. Yes. Where we848reviewed the freeze in 2019, we found that there were a number849of adverse effects.850    To the State Department, we found that about 65 or 39851percent of INL programs actually suffered adverse effects where852they had to reduce the geographical region in which they were853implementing programs, they had to reduce the number of854beneficiaries who could participate in trainings, they had to855reduce the quality of programs. And programs that relied on856implementing partners suffered even more consequences because857they had to lay people off, and they were unable to pick up858those programs when the funding resumed.859    However, that funding was really just a freeze of 1-year860funding. In a lot of ways those programs were able to continue861because the funding that was still available in the pipeline862from prior year's funding.863    We haven't had an opportunity to review the funding freeze864that is occurring right now, but my understanding is that those865programs aren't able to access prior year funding either, and866so my understanding is that they are not continuing at all. We867haven't had--I am sorry.868    Mr. Castro. Sure. Thank you for that. And let me ask a869followup really quick.870    Will the GAO be willing to conduct a review of the ongoing871freeze and cancellation of hundreds of millions of dollars in872foreign assistance programs?873    Ms. Kenney. Yes, we would be happy to do that work.874    Mr. Castro. Thank you so much.875    With that, I yield back, Chairwoman.876    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Ranking Member Castro.877    I now give the opportunity to Representative Lawler from878the State of New York.879    Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Chairwoman. It is common practice880for transnational criminal organizations in South and Central881America to source precursor chemicals from China and synthesize882illicit substances like fentanyl. These criminal organizations883then traffic them into the United States where they have884infiltrated far too many communities and led to unimaginable885tragedies for a lot of families across our Nation. 70,000886Americans are dying on an annual basis from fentanyl overdose.887    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez, how do you assess INL's role in888stopping the influx of deadly fentanyl into the United States?889    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. Well, clearly, INL and the U.S.890Government is not adequately acting either on resources or891focus to stop the flow of fentanyl. As you mentioned, over89270,000 just--overdose deaths just from fentanyl; when you add893in all the other illicit drugs, 100,000. And I think there is a894very real resource question that has to be addressed.895    There is also a partnership and cooperation side to that896where our relationship with Mexico, particularly over the past8974 years under the Biden administration, the cooperation,898security cooperation was almost nonexistent. Even offers to899support port security to identify fentanyl precursors coming in900were rejected by the Mexican government.901    The challenges of migration, which grew out of control902under the Biden administration as well, led to a de-903prioritization, in my opinion, of the fentanyl threat with dire904consequences.905    Now, President Trump has, obviously, rallied significant906resources, particularly from the Department of Defense, to the907border. I think that is an important aspect of the--confronting908this threat, but we also need to press the Mexican government909to take action.910    There is also--certainly, the administration is making911progress on that front and bringing to bear some economic912tools. I think INL is going to play an important role because913at some point we need to restore the security relationship with914Mexico to a functional arrangement with actually targeting the915cartels rather than just having symbolic actions by the Mexican916government be the sum total of the relationship, which is917essentially what we have seen for the past 4 years.918    Mr. Lawler. So what can INL do to address China's role919related to the precursor chemicals that are exported into920Mexico and other parts of the Western Hemisphere?921    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. So I think certainly with the922Chinese presence in Mexico is also significant. So there is923action to go after some of the brokers, as well as some of the924trade infrastructure, which is utilized by the Chinese in925Mexico to facilitate the--the flow of illicit precursors.926    I think more action also needs to be done in Asia on this927front. We have seen movement of illicit fentanyl supply chains928even out of China. Unfortunately, we don't have a cooperative929relationship on this issue with the government in China. So930there are significant limitations on INL's ability to act931there.932    But I think ensuring that, in Mexico in particular, we are933confronting the presence of Chinese criminal organizations, as934well as further south, we have already seen countries like935Guatemala the movement of these illicit supply chains of936fentanyl to new countries, and we need to make sure that we are937reinforcing border security, port security, and those security938relationships to make sure that it doesn't just migrate to939another country.940    Mr. Lawler. What--in what way is the INL working with other941entities within the U.S. Government, like the DEA, on this942particular issue, and how can they improve upon that to really943crack down on this?944    Obviously, we have a demand issue in this country that is945part of the problem of the deadly flow of fentanyl.946    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. Yes. So I think there is some947important cooperation with other agencies, particularly the948Department of Homeland Security, on the issue of border949security within the region and ensuring that regional partners950can have those capacities to ensure that those flows don't move951through their country without their ability to intercept them.952    And on the U.S. side and the side that you referred to, I953think there--as I understand it, there is some conversations954happening here in Congress about potential changes as far as955consequences, judicial consequences in the United States956where--that are going to align, I think, the reality of the957threats and the deadliness of this drug with the consequences958that people face.959    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Representative Lawler.960    Now I give the word to Representative Stanton of the State961of Arizona. You have five--been recognized for 5 minutes.962    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.963    The fentanyl crisis is especially acute in my home State of964Arizona where thousands of Arizonans die from opioid overdose965every single year. I know my colleagues and I across the aisle966agree, we need to do more to stop the flow of fentanyl and967other deadly narcotics into the United States of America.968    That is why I am at a loss to understand why the Trump969administration has moved to cut funding for the State970Department's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law971Enforcement Affairs' work in Mexico. Drastic cuts. INL works972across law enforcement agencies, intergovernmental agencies,973and with the courts in our partner countries to disrupt the974illicit drug trafficking and bring criminals to justice.975    Under previous administrations and with funding approved in976a bipartisan manner, Mexico has been the third largest977recipient of INL funds. INL supports more than a hundred978projects working to combat fentanyl trafficking and979transnational crime by providing services, training, and much-980needed equipment.981    One project that has benefited from the INL has deployed982cargo scanners and drug testing equipment to Mexico's Port of983Manzanillo, critical technology to detect and interdict984precursor chemicals from the People's Republic of China.985    Another INL project supported a recent operation in Tucson,986Arizona, that led to the arrests of drug trafficking leader and987six other operatives, a good return on taxpayer investment.988    Since the Trump administration's freeze on foreign aid,989only 15 percent of INL's programs in Mexico have received990waivers to resume their work, and many of those have not yet991received payment. As former Ambassador marine helicopter pilot992John Feeley phrased it recently, quote, ``They shot the golden993goose right in the leg,'' unquote.994    Make no mistake about it, the Trump administration is995hamstringing our response to fentanyl in the region, and while996the--while using this crisis as a justification to raise taxes997on working families through the misguided across-the-board998tariffs on Mexico.999    Mr. Isacson, how does this massive cut to INL program1000hamper our ability to stem the flow of fentanyl into the United1001States?1002    Mr. Isacson. It definitely deals a blow to our efforts1003against fentanyl. This is the hardest drug challenge we have1004ever faced. All pure fentanyl that is consumed in the United1005States in a year can fit in the beds of two or three pickup1006trucks spread out across a 2,000-mile border, unfortunately,1007about two-thirds of it coming right to your State right now.1008    In order to fight this, it is not just a matter of scanners1009at the border. You need cooperation from Mexico on everything1010you named, investigators, prosecutors, ports, intelligence, all1011capital letters, and you cut that off in 90 days and then maybe1012restart it? You have to restart everything all over again. It1013is incredibly disruptive.1014    Mr. Stanton. I appreciate that. Now, I have--in my time in1015public life both here in Congress and formerly as mayor of1016Phoenix, Arizona, I have been a friend to Mexico, making the1017case that we need to have a stronger economic unit between1018United States, Mexico, Canada, and that is how we are going to1019win this economic battle with China.1020    As a result, I have been a critic of the recent judicial1021reforms in Mexico, which I think is a step backward in terms of1022promoting U.S. investment in Mexico. INL has helped to train1023Mexican institutions to build and present strong legal cases1024against organized crime. Mexico's forensic labs and prisons are1025accredited to reach higher standards for forensic testing due1026to INL support. U.S. officials help to train police1027investigators in Mexico City, reducing violent crime in Mexico1028City by 58 percent, in partnership with now President1029Sheinbaum. And INL's support helped Mexico law schools update1030their curriculums to include Mexico's criminal law reform.1031    These offices that train police and prosecutors and relied1032on INL funds are now cut drastically by the dismantling of1033foreign assistance.1034    So another question for Mr. Isacson. You hosted a podcast1035last October about Mexico's constitutional reforms where you1036open by saying, quote, ``There promise to be serious setbacks1037in the struggle to hold powerful people and institutions1038accountable for corruption.''1039    How do Mexico's constitutional changes, including1040reorganization of National Guard and judicial reforms concern1041you? Maybe you could go on a little bit--for those who haven't1042listened to your podcast, go on a little bit more about the1043threat of the constitutional reforms.1044    Mr. Isacson. Sure. And I hope you call in my colleague who1045runs our Mexico program, Stephanie Brewer, who really knows1046this stuff.1047    But Mexico, they just changed their judiciary so that1048judges are now popularly elected, like people are going to come1049and vote for a long list of judges. A justice system,1050especially when they are working on these very complicated,1051very dangerous cases against these networks of corruption and1052powerful people who are ready to kill them need to be free of1053political pressures and need to be--need to be autonomous. And1054this just dealt a strong blow to that.1055    As well, substituting police and detectives and people who1056are in the community with National Guard troops who rotate in1057and out, that also makes it harder to actually--you can find1058crimes when they are happening, but you can't really get to the1059root of who is behind them.1060    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much. Madam chair, I yield1061back.1062    Ms. Salazar. Thank you. I now recognize Representative1063Shreve of the State of Arizona.1064    Mr. Shreve. Representative Shreve, Madam Chairwoman, is1065from the State of Indiana and is happy to be here.1066    Ms. Salazar. State of Indiana. I am sorry. Indiana is one1067of----1068    Mr. Shreve. Madam Chair, we agree. I thank the witnesses1069for being here.1070    I have a question that, in fairness, I will address to Ms.1071Kenney because I wasn't in the room to hear the testimony from1072our other witnesses, but I appreciate all of you sharing time1073and expertise with us.1074    Of course, INL defines its core mission as keeping America1075safe by countering crime, illegal drugs, and instability1076abroad. We recognize America is vulnerable to external threats,1077certainly including narcotics. We recognize that on both sides1078of the aisle.1079    In my view, the Trump administration is demonstrably making1080headway in securing our border and curbing some of the1081trafficking that was making its way up I-65 and across I-70 in1082Indiana, particularly on the fentanyl trafficking, we are1083seeing headway palpably within the district that I represent.1084    The most pressing drug-related threats in my part of the1085country would stem from the trafficking efforts of the Sinaloa1086cartel and the Jalisco cartel. These organizations, I am1087informed in part by some of the county sheriffs that I1088represent, dominate the wholesale supply of illicit opioids,1089particularly fentanyl and heroin in through my district.1090    The crisis is personal to me. I have friends and1091constituents who have lost loved ones to fentanyl poisoning,1092and this must continue to be a part--bipartisan priority. And1093Mr. Stanton had to step out, but I do think this is a1094bipartisan priority.1095    Since 2008, INL has overseen some 3 billion in funding for1096security counternarcotics and Rule of Law programs in Mexico.1097And, Mr. Isacson, you talked about the abrupt curtailing of1098some of that.1099    There were a few GAO reports of late highlighting gaps in1100INL's metrics in monitoring, raising concerns about the1101effectiveness of these programs. Certainly, the administration1102is attuned to those.1103    The GAO report concluded, without fully addressing the key1104elements for assessing progress, the U.S. Government cannot be1105assured that it is achieving its security goals in Mexico and1106that its investments at over 3 billion since 2008 are being1107spent effectively.1108    So I will direct my question to the witness that I heard1109from in her testimony, though invite anyone else that may have1110expertise to respond. Ms. Kenney, what lessons should INL pull1111from, take away from the GAO evaluation of its programs in1112Mexico that can be used to inform our future initiatives, our1113future investment in this cause?1114    Ms. Kenney. Thank you for this question. We reviewed the1115effectiveness, the results of the Merida Initiative and the1116Bicentennial Framework. We did our work sort of at a time1117period that straddled both of these strategies. And we looked1118to see what were the results of the $3 billion plus investment1119that the U.S. had made in Mexico.1120    What we found is that there were key elements of INL's1121performance management approach, if you will, that limited our1122ability to really evaluate its effectiveness. So in these1123strategies, both Merida and the Framework, the Bicentennial1124Framework, we found that they had established those top-level1125goals and objectives and that they had a number of individual1126projects and activities that address things like1127counternarcotics flows, fentanyl flows, and they are tracking1128data on the implementation of all of these activities.1129    They had not identified which of these activities were1130critical, which were the ones that were really critical to1131being able to assess the effectiveness of these top-line goals.1132They just hadn't identified the indicators and then monitored1133to align them to be able to say this suite of activities is1134going to demonstrate our progress in achieving this goal.1135    When we talked to the State Department about what were the1136challenges in being able to complete this--because this went1137back to the Merida Initiative which started in 2008--they said1138that they--that the U.S. Government was working with the1139Mexican government to come up with some shared set of1140indicators. These strategies are designed to be sort of shared1141approaches, both for the U.S. and Mexican government to be able1142to address these shared issues, shared challenges.1143    And that there were some challenges in being able to1144develop a common set of indicators. And some of the1145complicating factors were at the time, you know, new1146administrations both in Mexico and the United States. However,1147we would point out that, given the level of investment and1148given the continuity of these challenges, it is really1149important that the State Department figure out what these1150indicators are, figure out what these suite of activities1151should be to be able to support those top-line goals and be1152able to measure and share the effectiveness of those efforts1153going forward.1154    So that is really our recommendation. Our recommendation1155should be identified as a priority recommendation for the State1156Department. Of all of the recommendations that we make, we1157believe this is one of the most critical ones to be able to1158really make progress on the individual activities and efforts1159to be able to address this critical issue between U.S. and1160Mexico.1161    Mr. Shreve. Ms. Kenney, I appreciate it very much. My time1162has expired. Madam Chair, I yield back.1163    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Representative Shreve, of the State1164of Indiana. Appreciate your time with us.1165    Now I am going to recognize Representative Jackson of the1166State of Illinois for 5 minutes.1167    Mr. Jackson. Thank you, Representative Salazar. Thank you,1168Ranking Member.1169    Colombia is a regional leader in coordinating the1170multinational operation Campaign Orion, a Naval campaign1171focused on dismantling the transnational network of drug1172trafficking and related crimes.1173    During the 13th Edition of the Orion Naval Campaign last1174year, operations in which 125 institutions and 62 countries1175from Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, and for the first time1176Oceana-participating forces seized more than 400 tons of drugs1177thanks to the exchange of intelligence and the culmination of1178capabilities to counter the illicit trafficking of drugs and1179other illegal activities linked to narcotrafficking.1180    I must say that was a very diverse network. It had a high1181level of intelligence being interchanged, and they had shared1182interests. They had equity amongst all participants. DEI does1183work. I don't know where we get off on this tangent that makes1184no sense to me on diversity is bad. Diversity and equity is in1185quite a few constitutions around the world. We are going1186through a temporary period of some insanity to act as if E1187Pluribus Unum, out of many we are one, in the Americas.1188    I would like to let it be for the record that two-thirds of1189our hemisphere and population is not in the United States, and1190we are one contiguous land mass.1191    The operations reach record figures in narcotics seized,1192reducing the supply worldwide and dealing significant blows to1193the finances of multicrime organizations, preventing them from1194receiving more than $18.7 billion, according to the Colombian1195military forces. Authorities seized a total of 402 tons of1196solid chemical precursors and 1.6 million liters of liquid1197chemical precursors and destroyed 302 illegal infrastructures1198used for the extraction and processing of drugs.1199    The Colombian navy reported 112 boats seized and 2111200vehicles and on and on. Since this program started about 71201years ago, with only narco trafficking the Orion 12 have1202included other crimes that are present in the maritime land1203domain as well, such as arms and migrant smuggling,1204trafficking, money laundering and the like.1205    The 13 addition of the Orion Naval Campaigns have1206consolidated it as the most important and influential1207international cooperation strategy in the global fight against1208narco trafficking. And it has also managed to transcend in time1209thanks to innovation and rapid adaptation to respond to this1210highly complex and changing phenomenon.1211    Once again I want to thank each of you for coming. And this1212question will go to you, Mr. Isacson. Thank you for your1213outstanding service as well. Was is the impact of aid cuts in1214this program such as Orion Naval Campaigns.1215    Mr. Isacson. Well, the main impact has been that the1216Colombian national police and it is part of the effort to1217interdict cocaine has had some real disruptions, even many of1218their Black Hawk helicopters were grounded for a while because1219they didn't have money for maintenance or fuel. Trainings have1220been disrupted and the intelligence that you need in order to1221maintain this level of interdictions has been disrupted.1222    I don't know for how long because I just don't have the1223information for how long it has been cutoff and whether1224decisions have been made to give waivers. And if so, is that1225going to be mean a few blank months this year where the level1226of interdiction dips which has been at record levels or whether1227they are going to be able to recover that. But we will find out1228soon.1229    Mr. Jackson. Do you think that the money that might have1230been saved theoretically will come back to be a penny saved and1231a dollar foolish?1232    Mr. Isacson. I think so, because it's just not good1233government practice to stop all of your programs for 90 days1234and then to selectively restart them. Your partners just don't1235work like that. And it may cost them months and months, if not1236a couple of years to really recover from that, even if they do1237get to keep the level of funding they had before.1238    Mr. Jackson. Well, thanks so much.1239    Are you saying the whiplash, the backlash, the frenetic,1240the hectic pace, the capitulation, this erratic behavior is bad1241for a long-term goal of reducing the drug trafficking in our1242region?1243    Mr. Isacson. It was definitely good for the organized crime1244groups who wanted to evade the police and the navy and others1245in Colombia.1246    Mr. Jackson. I yield back. I thank you so much.1247    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Representative Jackson.1248    I now am going to recognize Representative Titus of the1249State of Nevada for 5 minutes.1250    Ms. Titus. Thank you madam chairman, ranking member.1251    Mr. Isacson, will you go over this for me just again very1252simply, what was the justification given by President Trump for1253levying tariffs against Mexico.1254    Mr. Isacson. The main justification was that Mexico wasn't1255cooperating enough in stopping Fentanyl coming into the United1256States.1257    Ms. Titus. And now the President has threatened a trade war1258with Mexico, has that compelled greater cooperation from their1259authorities on this issue?1260    Mr. Isacson. I guess that Mexico thinks they can stop the1261tariffs then they will come up with some seizures and they will1262bomb some labs and things like that, but it won't help with1263things like complex investigations and intelligence, no.1264    Ms. Titus. So it really hasn't moved----1265    Mr. Isacson. No, if the tariffs happened, then what1266incentive does Mexico have once their economy is cratering to1267keep cooperating.1268    Ms. Titus. That is part of the problem. Will they happen,1269will they not, from what products, how much, what percent, that1270sort of thing.1271    Will, cuts to it the INL programs in Mexico help or hurt1272our ability to stem the flow of Fentanyl into the country.1273    Mr. Isacson. Yes, we have seen this before, you can't just1274have better scanners at the border and hope--or bomb a few1275labs. It costs $60,000 to start a new Fentanyl lab. You need a1276lot of things that INL does, which is building intelligence,1277building core security programs, canine, courts. All this other1278stuff so that you can stop the whole network that is doing this1279rather than just trying to stop it at a scanner on the border.1280And if you disrupt INL programs, you are disrupting that very,1281very, very important ingredient in the fight.1282    Ms. Titus. So it is working counter to what you claim is1283the purpose of tariffs and other dealings with Mexico.1284    Mr. Isacson. Yes, threatening your partners, really taking1285away their incentive to cooperate, while freezing and1286restarting and halting and putting waivers and confusing the1287programs that you are running is obviously not going to be1288helpful. It is going to be helpful maybe to the people1289producing Fentanyl.1290    Ms. Titus. So in the meantime, in addition to the tariffs,1291can you talk about the effect of the Trump administration's1292prioritizing arbitrary mass deportations over things like root1293causes of terrorism, transnational crime, drug trafficking,1294human trafficking, weapons trafficking, et cetera?1295    Mr. Isacson. The Trump administration is trying to do mass1296deportation with the existing people they have, right? Like,12975,500 ICE enforcement removal officers, which means where do1298they get the manpower? They are taking it from DEA, they are1299taking it from DOJ, everything, Bureau of Prisons. His,1300Homeland Security Investigations, these are the agencies that1301are supposed to be working on these drugs cases, as well as1302cases everything from child pornography to human trafficking.1303They are all be devoted to rounding up migrants now, often even1304migrants without criminal records. And it is a really, really1305disastrous diversion of our law enforcement resources.1306    Ms. Titus. So could you sum that up by saying that it has1307made us less safe not more safe?1308    Mr. Isacson. Put it this way, if you are a Fentanyl1309trafficker or a child pornographer or something like that, you1310are feeling less pressure from the Federal law enforcement1311since January 20th because of this diversion of resources.1312    Ms. Titus. Because you know they are focused somewhere else1313and you can get away----1314    Mr. Isacson. Yes, they are focusing on migrants. And if you1315are not in the migrant smuggling business, you have less to1316worry about.1317    Ms. Titus. So if we are going to impose tariffs on Mexico,1318that is going to be attacks on families in my district. People1319in Nevada are going it pay more out-of-pocket. If you don't1320have money in your pocket, you can't go on holiday, people1321won't be coming to Las Vegas for a holiday. Certainly if you1322are from Canada or Mexico you are not going to be as likely to1323come as a tourist and that is our main source of tourism. And1324at the same time, what we are doing is undercutting our1325response to the flow of Fentanyl. Does that pretty much1326summarize the problem?1327    Mr. Isacson. There is--the arguments against tariffs are1328pretty strong economically here at home. But also yes, I mean,1329if you are a Mexican government official who even one who1330really believes in this fight, what is your incentive to1331cooperate if you're being punished without even any clear1332benchmarks or guidelines about how to stop the punishment. And1333the same goes for Fentanyl as well as working against migrant1334smuggling through Mexico too. What is going to push you to work1335harder to do the Americans a favor and work harder and together1336on this if you already have a 25 percent tariff on all of your1337goods.1338    Ms. Titus. Well, thank you. I yield back.1339    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Representative Titus.1340    Now we have--we are going to start a second round of1341questioning, not too long. And I am going to recognize myself1342for 5 minutes.1343    We all agree that we want to revamp and make INL a better1344agency, we all agree with that. And I was--just wanted to tell1345my respected ranking member that what the Trump administration1346is doing is trying to cut waste on important programs like INL1347because INL funded hip-hop classes in Guatemala. I go back to1348things that they should not be doing. We all agree that we have1349to cooperate with Mexico and that we have to help to help the1350Guatemalan police force and El Salvador. And by the way, one of1351the things I also wanted to--and I want to talk to three of1352you, I am not going to just hone in on Mr. Isacson. We1353decertified El Salvador, INL decertified El Salvador as a1354partner which led to the cuts in funds. These are the things I1355don't understand why, because you think Bukele may not be1356ideologically aligned with the State Department. Why are you1357going to do that? And the same thing with Guatemala. I am just1358stating what I think is commonsense.1359    Right now, in Latin America projects that prove to be1360effective are back online. For instance, targeting systems in1361Mexico and Peru that provide intelligence on foreign passengers1362and cargo. Dogs in Costa Rica.1363    So my question to Mrs. Kenney. Since you are an impartial1364force in this hearing, tell me in very simple terms for those1365people who are at home that do not want to spend taxpayers'1366money on things that are futile like hip-hop classes in1367Guatemala in which way that $2 billion that we give INL every1368year where do you think should be spent? Give it to me in 301369seconds like a good television sound bite so people back at1370home will say, OK, INL should be back on track. Tell me.1371    Ms. Kenney. So based on our review of the INL programs what1372we have found is that there are some consistent patterns in1373terms of implementation. GAO would not identify the policy1374choices that INL should make but we are happy to talk to you1375about the effectiveness of the implementation. And what we have1376found consistently is that there are opportunities to improve1377performance management, ensuring that the activities that you1378are funding are meeting your strategic goals. We saw it in1379Mexico, we saw it in firearms trafficking, we saw it in efforts1380in the Caribbean, making sure that the specific activities that1381you are funding are linking up and actually helping you achieve1382your goal.1383    Ms. Salazar. Why do you think that happens? So what you are1384telling me basically is that I am going to do this, but I am1385not sure if it is being effective or not, but I am going to put1386the money behind it anyway. Is that what you are telling me? So1387why do you think that happened? And how can it be changed? Why1388did it happen?1389    Ms. Kenney. Well, I think our recommendation is that the1390State Department figure out how to create that alignment that1391these activities should be funded to the overall strategic1392goals.1393    I think in Mexico what we found, what we heard is that1394there was some effort to coordinate with the Mexican government1395which is a good idea. However, we have been funding the Merida1396Initiative since 2008 and the administrations were going to1397change so that needed to be done.1398    I think when we looked at firearms trafficking we found1399similar programs or similar issues. We found that everyone1400would tell us of firearm trafficking in the Caribbean and in1401Central America and Mexico that these were important U.S.1402goals. But when we asked about where the metrics were, how they1403were measuring effectiveness, it didn't show up. They didn't1404have firearms trafficking as one of their performance measures1405so they weren't able to track it and demonstrate progress. It1406didn't show up in their strategies. So it is just important1407that whatever it is you decide your strategy, whatever your1408goal is you need to be sure that your activities are aligned1409with it and that you are able to track and line those ups to be1410sure that you are achieving the goals that you want to achieve.1411    Ms. Salazar. So I am sure the State Department is listening1412to you.1413    Now let me ask you, lets go to Mexico, maybe we can talk to1414Mr. Fernandez or Mr. Isacson. Mexico is a very important ally.1415It is our next door neighbor. We have got to work with them1416because no one is going to move, right? So we are going to stay1417where we are and so are they.1418    I remember that under AMLO, Mexico, President Trump had a1419very good relationship with President AMLO who had a completely1420different ideology than President Trump and that AMLO sent142137,000 troops to the southern borders with Guatemala. That1422worked very well. All of a sudden, they cooperated. So why did1423that stop? And what incentives are we giving now Sheinbaum who1424comes from that same Morena party. I hear that relationships1425are good between both governments. So what can they really do1426and in which way we could help them do it? And do they have the1427political willingness to receive money from the United States?1428We know that it is like we are neighbors but we are not1429necessarily love each other, but we have got to live with each1430other, correct? Am I right in my assessment? Let me start with1431you, Mr. Fernandez. What can we do?1432    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. I think it is important to your1433question about whether they will receive that assistance. I1434think it goes to the core of the issue.1435    Ms. Salazar. Will they receive the assistance?1436    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. They have rejected significant----1437    Ms. Salazar. What with they rejected?1438    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. I think because there are issues1439with corruption, there is issues with nationalism as well. I1440mean, we tried, I think very clearly under the Biden1441administration, to not pressure and do----1442    Ms. Salazar. Irrespectful.1443    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez.--positive engagement as was alluded1444to here. It obviously didn't result in anything substantive as1445far as countering the Fentanyl threat. It only expanded more1446greatly an d----1447    Ms. Salazar [continuing]. simply what happened during those14484 years once--why so much Fentanyl was able to come through?1449What did the Mexican government should have done that didn't1450do? And what can they do now under Sheinbaum, simple?1451    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. What happened over the past 4 years1452is we stopped pressuring them.1453    Ms. Salazar. We stopped pressuring them?1454    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. Yes.1455    Ms. Salazar. What pressures we should have implemented.1456    Mr. Martinez-Fernandez. Economic pressure I think is1457certainly the most potent that we have in the bilateral1458relationship with trade and the USMCA.1459    Ms. Salazar. Stop right there. You see Mr. Isacson, so I1460agree that tariffs are bad for our constituents, I get it. But1461then what other tool do we have as a country to send the1462message to our neighbors that we need help because we don't1463want any more American kids dying.1464    Mr. Isacson. Prosecutorial cooperation. From 2023 to 20241465there was a 22 percent decrease in Fentanyl seizures at the1466border. So far this year it is down another 23 percent. Less1467seems to being produced in Mexico, I think because of better1468cooperation. This may be premature but no one is declaring1469victory but there has actually been progress in the last 21470years.1471    Ms. Salazar. Very little, very little progress. We had1472100,000 kids dying every year.1473    Mr. Isacson. And deaths, thank goodness, are down about 301474percent.1475    Ms. Salazar. And the concoction of the chemicals are put1476together in Mexico.1477    Mr. Isacson. Yes, I agree.1478    Ms. Salazar. Right? And we just passed legislation that the1479Congress voted for where we are giving money so we can destroy1480those precursors before they get composed into a little pill1481and our kids die. So I am saying, what I am trying--political1482do we have political lenience as Sheinbaum, does she have1483political willingness to really work with us. We want to work1484with her.1485    Mr. Isacson. I think Sheinbaum does. I would be worried at1486about people at the State level in Mexico. I would be worried1487about corrupt military and police people.1488    Ms. Salazar. She had her own swamp.1489    Mr. Isacson. Yes, she does have a swamp that she has to1490clean up, as does their judicial system. The INL can help.1491    Ms. Salazar. Thank you. All right. I yield back.1492    Now I recognize Ranking Member Castro from the wonderful1493State of Texas for 5 minutes.1494    Mr. Castro. With respect to effective and serious and1495thoughtful cutting of waste, fraud, and abuse in government, I1496don't think it is going to be carried out by this DOGE1497committee that is being lead by folks who have absolutely no1498expertise in this area, by 22-year olds and 20-year olds with a1499nickname of Big Balls. They are not going to accomplish what we1500are trying to accomplish here. They have no background in any1501of this. Hardly any life experience, quite honestly. And more1502than that, they are keeping all of their work secretive.1503    In fact, Elon Musk, as I recall, threatened the press that1504he would file suit or said that it was illegal if they just1505identified who these people were, that are making these massive1506decisions about how our government operates. And that is not1507fair to the American people. It is not fair to American1508taxpayers to have a secret group in charge of what is going on1509in government that won't show its face at the United States1510Capitol.1511    Even more than that, a majority party in Congress that sent1512even asking them to show up, isn't even demanding that they1513show up and account for the work that they are doing. That is1514where we are right now. I hope that everybody in the full1515committee on this dais when we have our full committee meetings1516will join me and others in asking Elon Musk and those1517responsible for cuts to INL, cuts at the State Department,1518USAID to come here and present to us their work.1519    We can't even get a clear answer of what percent of INL,1520for example, is being cut. And that applies to other agencies1521and bureaus as well. So why doesn't this full committee ask1522Elon Musk to come and sit in these chairs as our three1523witnesses have today and explain the cuts that have been made1524and why they have been made?1525    The one person we had come as I recall Pete Marocco, whose1526job title has now changed, he came and I don't know who1527insisted, I don't know if the committee insisted or he and his1528people insisted that it not be a public hearing, that it be a1529closed door private briefing and instead of having 5 minutes to1530ask questions we had 2 or 3 minutes to ask questions. Just1531bizarre.1532    This is the U.S. Government and we are running our country1533right now or the country is being run like these countries that1534we have been critiquing for decades and decades, by people who1535are doing secretive things, not transparent. And so look, I1536agree that that is why you have a GAO, that is why you have1537inspectors general. Yes, can we do more than that? Yes, I think1538that we could do more than that. I think we should do more than1539that. And we do need to make adjustments because things do get1540stale and, you know, need to change and money.1541    Maria Elvira, I was your Democratic colead on that Fentanyl1542bill on precursors. I thought that was a good piece of1543legislation.1544    Remember, I have been presented now I think at least twice1545we have been told in this committee and then in my other1546committee in unclassified information that, you know, 70 to 901547percent of the precursors or the original source material for1548Fentanyl comes to the United States first and then goes over to1549Mexico and it ends up coming back.1550    So these are serious problems, but they demand serious1551approaches and they demand people with expertise who actually1552know what they are doing, you know, really nothing against1553people in their early twenties, I wish I was still in my early1554twenties. But the people who have been put in charge of1555overseeing this have absolutely no background or no expertise1556to do it.1557    With that, I yield back, chairman.1558    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, ranking member. I thank the1559witnesses for their valuable testimony and the members for1560their questions. The members of the subcommittee may have some1561additional questions for the witnesses. We will ask you to1562respond to these in writing.1563    Pursuant to committee rules, all members may have 5 days to1564submit statements, questions and other materials for the record1565subject to the length limitations.1566    Without objection, this committee stands adjourned. Once1567again thank you for your participation.1568    [Whereupon, at 12:41 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]15691570                               APPENDIX15711572                              ----------15731574               Material Submitted for the Hearing Record15751576[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]15771578                                 [all]